UMA MAHESWARI Vs. V MATHIVANAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the wife. This revision is directed against the dismissal of the C. M. A. No. 41 of 2000 as not maintainable by the learned Principal District Judge. Nagapattinam as per the judgment dated 26-9-2000.

(2.) The respondent herein is the husband of the revision petitioner and he filed H. M. O.P. No. 11 of 1999 against his wife, viz., the revision petitioner herein to declare the marriage held between them as null and void under Section 12(1) (a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, The revision petitioner filed 1. A. No. 148 of 1999 claiming interim maintenance as contemplated under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

(3.) The trial Court considering the case of either parties that since the respondent herein is working as lecturer in Annamalai University and since it is stated by the respondent herein that he is earning about Rs. 5,000/-, directed the respondent herein to pay interim maintenance to the revision petitioner at the rate of Rs. 750/- per month from the date of the petition, i.e., 27-8-1999, besides Rs. 1,000/- towards litigation expenses, as per order dated 29-12-1999. The wife not satisfied with the interim maintenance so awarded filed Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 41 of 2000. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was dismissed as not maintainable relying on the decision reported in AIR 1991 Bombay 423 (Sunil Hansraj Gupta v. Payal Sunil Gupta). The judgment is challenged in this Civil Revision Petition by the wife, viz., the revision petitioner.